Links

GRACIOUS CHARACTER OF THE DIVINE COVENANTS

GRACIOUS CHARACTER
OF THE DIVINE COVENANTS

We saw last week that, after the Fall, there are seven divine covenants which
were initiated by God with His people (through a representative), viz.:
Adamic Covenant, Noahic Covenant, Abrahamic Covenant, Mosaic Covenant, Davidic
Covenant and the New Covenant. We saw that these divine covenants are, in fact,
structurally united to each other, and carry the same theme: “I shall be your
God, and ye shall be My people.” This means that each of the divine covenants must,
in fact, be a progressive manifestation of the same everlasting covenant. We
see that the promise of the Adamic Covenant is that a Messiah will die on
behalf of God’s people so that the covenantal theme may be realised; the Noahic
Covenant adds that the world will be kept from destruction until the whole
number of the elect be brought under the Messiah; the Abrahamic Covenant adds a
sacrament which distinguishes God’s people, including their children, from the
rest of the people in the world; the Mosaic Covenant adds stipulations for
covenant life, as well as another sacrament which directly points to the
priestly ministry of the coming Messiah; the Davidic Covenant reveals the
kingly character and office of the Messiah; and finally the New Covenant brings
to culmination all that is promised.

In examining the theme of each of the divine covenants, we confirmed that each
one has to do with the salvation of God’s people. In other words, it is not
about building the nation of Israel as a nation, but as the covenant people of
God. Indeed, God is not even primarily concerned with the whole number of the
external, visible gathering of people who profess to be in league with God. He
is rather, primarily, concerned with the “children of the promise” or His elect.
The external, visible people are called “His people” only because the visible
people is viewed organically as one with the whole being identified according
to the better part. In other words, as the children of the promise or the elect
were found largely in the nation of Israel under the Old Covenant, the nation
was known as the covenant people of God or as the elect nation.

In this article, we add a further proof to the unity of the covenant, and the
reality of a Covenant of Grace spanning redemptive history from the Fall to the
consummation of all things. As it is our thesis that the Covenant of Grace or
the everlasting covenant manifests itself in subordinate covenants, we may
accomplish our purpose by showing that each of the divine covenants manifests a
gracious unconditional character pertaining to salvation. In other words, we
want to show that there is only one way of salvation, namely by grace through
faith in the Lord Jesus Christ (cf. Eph 2:8–9; Rom 1:17), throughout the span
of redemptive history.

It is sufficient for us to examine the covenants under the old dispensation, as
few would doubt the gratuitous character of the New Covenant.

Adamic Covenant

The Adamic Covenant is most assuredly gratuitous. Adam had just broken the
Covenant of Works and had fallen into an estate of sin and misery. While the
natural mind might expect God to punitively impose an exacting requirement of
conformity to a plethora of laws and ordinances in order for man to be saved,
the Bible strikingly reveals that this was far from the case. Adam, and the
whole human race, which he represented, is indeed punished for his sin, but
salvation as declared in the protevangelium would come not by
his own effort but by a Saviour whom the LORD would send. Notice that no
condition at all is given to Adam or to his seed in order to the fulfilment of
the promise.

Adam understood this gracious provision for his and his children’s salvation
and demonstrated his faith in the promise when he called his wife Eve, because
she was mother of all living (Gen 3:20). Furthermore, by providing coverings
for Adam and Eve’s nakedness, made with the skin of a slain animal, God was in
fact typically prefiguring His atoning grace through the cover for sin that the
death of Christ would provide. Salvation for Adam and Eve and their posterity,
in other words, was gratuitously initiated by God under the Adamic Covenant.

Noahic Covenant

The gracious character of the Noahic Covenant is even clearer than in the
Adamic Covenant. Genesis 6:5–7 declares that the depth and extent of the
wickedness of man had provoked God in His decision to destroy him from the face
of the earth. But in sharp contrast to this solemn declaration of condemnation,
Genesis 6:8 declares that “Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.” This is a
most significant statement within the inaugural context of the Covenant and is
illustrative of the nature of the Covenant itself. But could the statement mean
that Noah merited grace? Robertson’s exposition is most helpful and succinct
here:

It may be that God’s grace had kept
Noah from sinking to the levels of depravity found among his contemporaries.
But nothing indicates that Noah’s favoured position arose from anything other
than the grace of the Lord himself. The term “grace,” which describes God’s
attitude to Noah, occasionally refers to something other than a response of
mercy to a sinful situation (cf. Gen 39:4; 50:4; Num 32:5; Prov 5:19; 31:30).
But when describing God’s response to fallen man, “grace” depicts a merciful
attitude to an undeserving sinner. In Noah’s day, every initial formation of
the thoughts of man’s heart… were only evil all the day. But Noah found grace
in the eyes of the Lord.

Although Genesis 6:9 affirms that Noah was a “righteous man,” structural
considerations characteristic of the book of Genesis forbid the conclusion that
Noah received “grace” because of a previously existing righteousness. The
phrase “these are the generations of…” which begins Genesis 6:9 occurs 10 times
in Genesis. Each time the phrase indicates the beginning of another major
section of the book. This phrase decisively separates the statement that “Noah
found grace” (Gen 6:8) from the affirmation that Noah was a “righteous man”
(Gen 6:9). God’s grace to Noah did not appear because of this man’s
righteousness, but because of the particularity of God’s program of redemption
(Op. Cit., 112–3).

Despite this clear exposition, it may be argued that if the preservation of
Noah and his family is a picture of salvation, then Noah did work and was saved
by work after all, he built the ark. But this argument falls apart when we
begin to consider the fact that ark itself would not save Noah and his family
were it not for the supernatural protection of the LORD as intimated by the
phrase “the LORD shut him in” (Gen 7:16). The building of the ark was rather a
message to the unrepentant people living during the days of Noah (cf. Heb
11:7).

A further and most remarkable indication of the gracious character of the
Noahic Covenant may be found in the reason given by the LORD for its
establishment:

And the LORD smelled a sweet savour;
and the LORD said in his heart, I will not again curse the ground any more for
man’s sake; for the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth; neither
will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done (Gen 8:21).

This reason given seems almost incongruous. If the imagination of man’s heart
is evil continually, should not the LORD continue to destroy the earth for the
wickedness of man? Commentators have long struggled with this issue, and newer
translations of the Bible have replaced the word “for” with “although” (NKJV)
or “even though” (NIV). But however it is translated or explained it is clear
that man does not deserve God’s promise of preservation at all. If he deserves
anything at all, it is continual destruction. Indeed then, the Noahic Covenant
is fully gracious. This is further confirmed by the fact that no condition is
actually attached to the fulfilment of the Covenant.

Abrahmic Covenant

The gracious character of the Covenant of Grace finds its full expression in
the Abrahamic Covenant through God’s dramatic act of ratification of the
Covenant as recorded in Genesis 15:8–18. This act should best be interpreted as
a self-maledictory oath (cf. Jer 34:18–20), in which God anthropomorphically
calls upon Himself a curse of dismemberment if He fails to fulfil His promise
to Abraham (see Murray, Covenant of Grace, 16). We note also that
Abraham was not called to pass through the pieces at all, which clearly indicates
that the Abrahamic Covenant, and so the Covenant of Grace, is not merely a
mutual compact or agreement between two equal parties. Rather, it is a
unilateral “bond-in-blood sovereignly administered.” The fulfilment of this
covenant is therefore not dependant on man’s keeping it at all. It rests
entirely on the LORD and therefore is totally gratuitous.

It may be argued that a condition of circumcision seems to be attached to the
fulfilment of the Covenant, therefore annulling its gracious character. This is
particularly seen Genesis 17:14, “And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh
of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people;
he hath broken my covenant.” To answer this object, it must first be admitted
that Genesis 17:14 does indeed specify a condition. But at the same time, it
must be categorically denied that this is a condition of the Covenant. To say
that it is a condition of the covenant is to understand that “the covenant is
not to regarded as dispensed until the conditions are fulfilled and that the
conditions are integral to the establishment of the covenant relation”
(Murray, Covenant of Grace, 19). To do so would be to deny the
immutability of the promise of God, which the author of Hebrews alluded to when
commenting on God’s cutting of the covenant with Abraham (Heb 6:13–18). How
then should we understand the condition in Genesis 17:14? Murray answers this
question cogently:

The continued enjoyment of this
grace [which is dispensed in the covenant relationship] and the relationship
established is contingent upon the fulfilment of certain conditions. For apart
from the fulfilment of these conditions the grace bestowed and the relationship
established are meaningless. Grace bestowed implies a subject and reception on
the part of that subject. The relation established implies mutuality. But the
conditions in view are not really conditions of bestowal. They are simply the
reciprocal response of faith, love and obedience, apart from which the
enjoyment of the covenant blessing and of the covenant relation is
inconceivable. In a word, keeping the covenant presupposes the covenant
relation as established rather than the condition upon which its establishment
is contingent (Ibid, 19).

Murray’s argument finds a strong biblical support from Moses himself in
Deuteronomy 9:4–5, where he no doubt refers to the Abrahamic Covenant:

Speak not thou in thine heart, after
that the LORD thy God hath cast them out from before thee, saying, For my
righteousness the LORD hath brought me into possess this land: but for
the wickedness of these nations the LORD doth drive them out from before thee.
Not for thy righteousness, or for the uprightness of thine heart, dost thou go
to possess their land: but for the wickedness of these nations the LORD thy God
doth drive them out from before thee, and that he may perform the word
which the LORD sware unto thy fathers, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob (italics
mine).

Indeed, it is because of the gracious character of the Abrahamic Covenant, that
we find the Apostle Paul arguing for “salvation by grace through faith,” by the
fact that Abraham was declared righteous and so experienced the covenantal
relationship even before he was circumcised (Rom 4:1–25).

Mosaic Covenant

While it is generally agreed that the Abrahamic Covenant displays its gracious
character very vividly, the same is not usually said of the Mosaic Covenant. In
fact, the Mosaic Covenant is generally not recognised by Dispensational
theologians as being gracious at all.

Perhaps the reason for this failure to see grace in the Mosaic Covenant can be
found in the interpretation of the introductory statement of the Mosaic
Covenant found in Exodus 19:5, “Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed,
and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all
people: for all the earth is mine.” On the surface, this statement seems to
make the Covenant conditional upon obedience, but Murray correctly observes
that the verse does not say, “If ye will obey my voice and accept the terms
stipulated, then I will make my covenant with you” (Murray, Op. Cit.,
24). Rather, the Covenant is presupposed, and Israel is called simply to keep
it. Of course, the fact that Exodus 19:5 does carry a conditional element
cannot be denied, but what is conditioned upon obedience is not the covenant
relationship itself but the enjoyment of the blessings which the Covenant
contemplates.

In the same way, a false interpretation of Exodus 24:7–8 may suggest that Moses
inaugurated the Covenant on the basis of the obedience of the people:

And he took the book of the
covenant, and read in the audience of the people: and they said, All that the
LORD hath said will we do, and be obedient. And Moses took the blood, and
sprinkled it on the people, and said, Behold the blood of the covenant, which
the LORD hath made with you concerning all these words (Ex 24:7–8).

Once again, the error lies in the assumption that the Covenant has not already
been established despite the fact that the text says, “the covenant, which the
LORD hath made.” The point is: the Covenant had already been established and
Moses was merely ratifying and sealing it by the sprinkling of blood.

The Davidic Covenant

We have already seen that the Davidic Covenant is most clearly referred to in
Psalm 89. It is also in this psalm that we see the unconditional and therefore
gracious character of the Davidic Covenant most clearly:

My mercy will I keep for him for
evermore, and my covenant shall stand fast with him. His seed also will I make
to endure for ever, and his throne as the days of heaven. If his children
forsake my law, and walk not in my judgments; If they break my statutes, and
keep not my commandments; Then will I visit their transgression with the rod,
and their iniquity with stripes. Nevertheless my lovingkindness will I not
utterly take from him, nor suffer my faithfulness to fail. My covenant will I
not break, nor alter the thing that is gone out of my lips. Once have I sworn
by my holiness that I will not lie unto David. His seed shall endure for ever,
and his throne as the sun before me (Ps 89:28–36).

Essentially, God’s promise is that no matter what happens, David’s seed will
remain on the throne. This promise of God is referred to again and again
throughout the history of the Kingdom
of Judah. When Solomon
went astray towards the end of his reign, the Lord warned him that all the
tribes saved one would be rent away from him, and the reason for that one
exception is the covenant He had made with David (1 Kgs 11:12). Solomon’s son
Rehoboam was an evil king, yet the Lord allowed him to sit on the throne, for
David’s sake (1 Kgs 15:4). King Jehoram was a friend of Ahab. He was not a good
king at all, and God could have destroyed Judah for his wickedness, but He
refrained for David’s sake (2 Kgs 8:19).

From this, it may be seen that the Davidic Covenant is unconditional. But two
questions may be asked. Firstly, if it is entirely unconditional, and God will
not revoke His promise, then why is it that after Zedekiah in 586 BC, no child
of David continued to sit on the throne? The answer to this apparent
inconsistency is to be found in the fact that the descendants of David, under
the Old Covenant, were only fulfilling the promise of the Davidic Covenant
typically just as the conquest of Canaan only
fulfilled the promise of the Abrahamic Covenant typically. It was only when
Christ was ascended on high after His resurrection and was seated on the right
hand of the throne of God that the promise of the Davidic Covenant was truly
fulfilled.

But secondly, it may be asked: How does the Davidic Covenant teach salvation by
grace through faith? To answer this question, we must realise, first of all,
that the Davidic Covenant does not stand alone, but is a development of the
earlier divine covenants. But the fact that the redemptive element is still in
focus can be seen in Isaiah 55:3, “Incline your ear, and come unto me: hear,
and your soul shall live; and I will make an everlasting covenant with you,
even the sure mercies of David.” The individual who is included in the Davidic
Covenant, comes into active participation in the Covenant by faith, and enjoys
the benefit of the deliverance and kingship of Christ.

Conclusion

We have shown that each of the divine covenants under the Old Dispensation is
indeed gratuitous. This, together with the fact that they do not stand
independently, but are structurally and thematically united, shows that they
are in fact manifestations of the one Covenant of Grace which is developed
progressively over the ages according to God’s infinite wisdom. Covenant
Theology is not a theological framework imposed upon the Scripture. Neither is
it to be derived only from a few verses in Scripture, such as Romans 5:12–21,
though it would have been sufficient were it so. It is, rather, a theology of
redemption progressively revealed in the Word of God, like a flower opening a
petal at a time until it is at full bloom with the incarnation of Christ and
the inauguration of the New Covenant.